Legal Opinion

Stofflet v. Strome

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 16, 1894PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Kalamazoo. .(Buck, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.

This suit is based upon a promissory note for $25, dated March 20, 1890, which the defendant promised to pay to the order of the Evangelical Church of Vicksburg, Michigan. Plaintiff recovered judgment, and *199defendant appeals. Plaintiff's articles of association were dated May 14, 1887, acknowledged in February, 1889, and recorded with the county clerk December 23, 1892.

1. The first contention is that the plaintiff corporation was not in existence at the time the note was given, and therefore no recovery can be had. The corporation was. organized under chapter 170, How. Stat. Section 4621…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Merrill v. President of KalamazooMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
  2. Willard v. Trustees of Methodist Episcopal Church of Rockville CentreIllinois Supreme Court · 1872

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Tidey v. Kent Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Lehman v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1914

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API